The REAL problem with gunships

[Zoom_VI]

If you think there is no skill in gunship play, you have not played them.

 

Half blind, trying to zero in on moving targets at extreme range (range that actually plays to the strength of scout speed and strike fighter maneuvers),

This is dead wrong I'm sorry, range plays into the gunship's favor. The farther out a target is the smaller that target's movements are relative to the gunship. So when your at far range you might boost for 4km but relative to the gunship you only moved a couple degrees in his scope. And since railguns are instant the gunship doesn't have to account for projectile travel time.

 

knowing that you are prime on the list of things to kill, knowing you cannot escape once you are spotted, suiting up and going out there anyhow---for the team.

And how is that any different than playing a scout and knowing that one's lifespan is measured by how long it takes a gunship to get LoS on you.

 

This is my point, right now gunships both in how they are killed and how they kill is entirely dependant on how sneaks up first. Gunships gets first shot - gunship wins. Scout gets first shot - Scout wins.

 

Getting obliterated by a attack you cannot even remotely counter is not fun for either the scout or the gunship.

 

I have not seen many one-shot deaths, I think most of that argument is exaggerated. Damaged ships going down in one shot, yes. I've seen 2 or 3 hits to take out an opponent. I've seen wounded ships finished off by a teammate. In flying gunships, mostly I get 'assists' and that's just fine. Very few outright kills.

It is well know that bypass guarantees a one-shot kill, and slugs have a 20% crit chance and a crit will one-shot without bypass. And a non-crit no bypass still leaves a scout with less than 10% of their HP and little shields, so they will go down with the next light breeze.

 

History of combat flight shows us that there are always unequal designs on the battlefield, and yet, pilots climb into the cockpit and try to do the job. I think a little tension in the dynamic between the three styles is what makes the whole game successful.

Inequality is a ingrained facet of real combat. But then again how many veterans do you see talking about how enjoyable the firefights where? You don't want that kind of realism in a game because realism isn't fun for anyone

 

Almost every Star Wars cinema scene showing space combat demonstrates one shot and quick death, either by trying to avoid getting shot (flying into obstacles) or by getting hit squarely by an opponent. The only avoidance is grazing shots, or fast repairs when hit badly.

In star wars cinema entire ships disappear without leaving debris. And I never once saw a snipercraft in any of the movies, but on your idea maybe my scout's quads need to be buffed so I can one-shot stuff too?

 

Some of my best moments in the game is surviving several hits when being chased down by 1 or 2 scouts/strike ships. Trust me I don't last long.

My best moments are when nobody is playing a gunship so all my targets are moving ones and all my attackers have to deal with leading their shots rather than instahits.

[arrefmak]

This is dead wrong I'm sorry, range plays into the gunship's favor. The farther out a target is the smaller that target's movements are relative to the gunship. So when your at far range you might boost for 4km but relative to the gunship you only moved a couple degrees in his scope. And since railguns are instant the gunship doesn't have to account for projectile travel time.

I did not mean to indicate that range was not the strength of the gunship.

 

However, when you are trying to track a scout/strike amidst the frames/asteroids/rock formations, you can barely rotate as quickly as the opposing ship moves. You also see most ships behind obstacles about 50% of the time. Sometimes a target will dart between obstacles---and maybe your gun cycle matches that narrow window. Your point about degrees of movement is correct---but does not account for the battlefield issues.

 

I think the scout/strike pilots have made the case elsewhere in threads: you can predict the gunships, you can take them out, the environ favors the scout/strike. Even in an open space area, which is more to the gunship advantage, gunships are going to have to do more work/skill than sit and shoot.

 

I cannot comment on the skill bypass you are talking about. I have not seen it yet.

 

My best moments are when nobody is playing a gunship so all my targets are moving ones and all my attackers have to deal with leading their shots rather than instahits.

 

So this really seems to be the crux: you think rail guns are a bust.

So how do you feel about missile lock-ons?

[Zoom_VI]

So this really seems to be the crux: you think rail guns are a bust.

So how do you feel about missile lock-ons?

Well missiles

1) give me a warning

2) rarely if ever one-shot, and the one-shots require extensive lock time which means extensive time listening to said warning and plotting my escape

3) are subject to lock-breaking abilities.

4) can be out run

 

Really on the fighters the primary weapons are their main source of killing power, the only exception is the quell.

 

 

Condensed version of my opinions:

 

I a flashfire sneaks up on gunship, once I have range on him he is screwed, his only option at that point is to die. Conversely if a gunship gets LoS at range on me my only option is also to die.

 

There should never be any situation where one class completely hardcounters another class to the point that the victim has a absolutely zero chance of surviving regardless of what he does.

Gunships should have their escapes and survivability buffed so they can't be Scout blitzed, and should have their weapons changed so that their target receives something like a lock-on warning and cannot one-shot either.

[TUXs]

This is dead wrong I'm sorry, range plays into the gunship's favor. The farther out a target is the smaller that target's movements are relative to the gunship. So when your at far range you might boost for 4km but relative to the gunship you only moved a couple degrees in his scope. And since railguns are instant the gunship doesn't have to account for projectile travel time.

 

How many objectives have you seen captured, or captured yourself from 15K out? Their "strength" is also their weakness.

[sosolidshoe]

How many objectives have you seen captured, or captured yourself from 15K out? Their "strength" is also their weakness.

 

How many dead pilots have you seen capturing objectives? Getting one-shotted before you can get near an objective is a damn-sight more of an impediment to capping it than having to fly to it slightly more slowly. And that's not even considering that gunships are perfectly capable of parking themselves -on- objectives - there are points in the superstructure of the objectives a gunship can park in, switch shields double-front, and be essentially invulnerable for the whole match, since any attempt to kill them requires sitting stationary right in front of them. And that's not even considering the subset of gunship pilots who enjoy clipping inside turrets thus making themselves invulnerable until the turrets are destroyed.

 

The more I read these threads, the more I suspect quite a few people have deceived themselves into believing they're ace pilots because they've fragged a few people playing gunships for a couple of matches to get the double Fleet Requisition.

[Sangrar]

I have played all 3 ships, gunship is no cakewalk either and it does take some skill. You have to hit a moving target that moves erratically, with the greater distance becomes a smaller target, and, if it has evasion armor with possibly abilities that aid evasion, a shot fired can end up missing by a few meters. On top of shooting an erratic target that can boost away at any time, we also produce a glow when charging up which makes us very visible, even despite sensor dampening which makes us an open target and when we are found it takes skill and a bit of luck to escape, you have shorter boost capability than the other classes which means you have to lose them fast, and most times they get you anyway despite a barrel roll here and going behind an asteroid, the only way you survive is if the scout chasing you accidently hits barrel roll by mistake and accidently pounds into an asteroid. Don't tell me that shooting a small target with erratic movements and escaping scouts and strikers that find you takes little skill.

[Hambunctious]

Screw any potential balance issues... they just don't make logical sense. Midget deathstars that have to stand still to fire... its just down right stupid. If this was a Star Wars space battle in the movies the Capital ship turbo laser gunners would have a field day. They should have given them a cool down to double the range of whatever laser cannon they had equiped or to fire two primary weapons at the same time.... this space sniper malarky really breaks the immersion of being in a Star Wars style spaceship battle... when was the last time even the Capital ships just hovered... the only thing in the HISTORY of the F*ing Star Wars universe that stopped before it shoots was the Death Star.

 

Gunships need to be entirely rethought, the way they are currently in the game IS. NOT. Star Wars.

 

That was one of my biggest gripes. There's no place for them in their current form in any lore. A gunship is a turreted multiperson craft mainly used as an escort, or transport.

 

If they had gone with a missileboat being used in the same manner, except using missiles, then that would've been acceptable. The ships they call gunships in this game actually look more like the lore missileboat than the gunship.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Hambunctious